The approach of the millennium has generated a spate of books on the history of our calendar. Here’s an especially good one. According to Richards, the calendar originated in humanity’s desire to track the natural phenomena on which life in primitive society depended. Seasonal cycles of crop growth and animal migrations relate to the sun; tides relate to phases of the moon; and the cycle of dark and light caused by Earth’s rotation makes itself manifest every day. But the relationships among these three astronomical phenomena cannot be expressed simply. Much of the history of calendars has to do with compromises made in trying to juxtapose these three cycles. At the same time, in almost every culture, the religious impulse has imposed its overlay on the calendar. Days of the week (an arbitrary but convenient division of time) were given names related to ancient gods or to planets associated with them spiritually; each of the major religions boasts its own calendar, with its own succession of seasons and holy days. After outlining the science of calendar-making, Richards describes many calendars used over the ages, including the Mayan and Aztec, and the French Revolution’s attempt to divorce timekeeping from religion. The mathematics of calendars is given due attention, especially the calculation of the day of the week for past dates, and conversions between calendars—e.g., from our Gregorian calendar to the Jewish or Mayan counterparts. A final section discusses problems caused in Western calendars by the shifting date of Easter, estimated by a complex formula, and a major bone of contention among the various denominations. Appendices provide useful astronomical constants, the names of the days of the week in sundry languages, the French Revolutionary calendar, and a glossary of technical terms. Clearly written and filled with detail, this will be a strong contender in the calendar-book sweepstakes. (76 illustrations)
Pub Date: Dec. 1, 1998
ISBN: 0-19-850413-6
Page Count: 450
Publisher: Oxford Univ.
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Nov. 15, 1998
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis...
Privately published by Strunk of Cornell in 1918 and revised by his student E. B. White in 1959, that "little book" is back again with more White updatings.
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis (whoops — "A bankrupt expression") a unique guide (which means "without like or equal").Pub Date: May 15, 1972
ISBN: 0205632645
Page Count: 105
Publisher: Macmillan
Review Posted Online: Oct. 28, 2011
Kirkus Reviews Issue: May 1, 1972
This is not the Nutcracker sweet, as passed on by Tchaikovsky and Marius Petipa. No, this is the original Hoffmann tale of 1816, in which the froth of Christmas revelry occasionally parts to let the dark underside of childhood fantasies and fears peek through. The boundaries between dream and reality fade, just as Godfather Drosselmeier, the Nutcracker's creator, is seen as alternately sinister and jolly. And Italian artist Roberto Innocenti gives an errily realistic air to Marie's dreams, in richly detailed illustrations touched by a mysterious light. A beautiful version of this classic tale, which will captivate adults and children alike. (Nutcracker; $35.00; Oct. 28, 1996; 136 pp.; 0-15-100227-4)
Pub Date: Oct. 28, 1996
ISBN: 0-15-100227-4
Page Count: 136
Publisher: Harcourt
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 15, 1996
BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW
© Copyright 2025 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Follow
Popular in this Genre
We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!
It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!
Already have an account? Log in.
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Welcome Back!
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
